President Trump said yesterday that he will try to get back some territory for Ukraine when he meets with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday. He also stated that there would be “some swapping, changes in land” between Russia and Ukraine.
Whether the world could or should trust a “peace” to which Mr. Putin agrees on these terms is another matter, an issue I explored in my new website article, “Vladimir Putin and the problem of autocratic power.” But why would Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky agree to such an arrangement?
In recent days, he stated repeatedly that he would not concede Ukrainian land to Russia. Mr. Zelensky said last Saturday that his country could not violate its constitution on territorial issues, adding that “Ukrainians will not gift their land to the occupiers.”
However, the Telegraph headlined yesterday that Ukraine is now “prepared to cede territory held by Russia” as part of a peace plan. It reported that Mr. Zelensky “told European leaders that they must reject any settlement proposed by Donald Trump in which Ukraine gives up further territory—but that Russia could be allowed to retain some of the land it has taken. This would mean freezing the frontline where it is and handing Russia de facto control of territory it occupies in Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson, and Crimea.”
Russia currently occupies around 20 percent of Ukraine’s territory as defined by Kyiv’s internationally recognized 1991 borders. Conceding these regions would require a nationwide referendum in Ukraine.
Why would their nation make such a move now?
What is the history of Ukraine?
Ukraine is the largest country in Europe after Russia, with a land area about 87 percent the size of Texas and a population of more than forty-two million. Different areas of the region were invaded and occupied by numerous groups over the centuries, but they are all now part of Ukraine.
Most of Ukraine fell to Russian rule in the eighteenth century, then became a republic of the Soviet Union after World War I and the Russian Revolution of 1917. Parts of western Ukraine were divided between Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Romania. By the end of World War II, the borders were redrawn to include these western Ukrainian territories.
After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Ukraine voted for independence on December 1, 1991, with 92 percent of Ukrainians in support. After a mass protest movement in 2014 toppled the pro-Russian government, Russian troops occupied the Ukrainian autonomous republic of Crimea. Russia later annexed the peninsula. In February 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine.
By some estimates, the current war has displaced a third of Ukraine’s population, with as many as 1.6 million Ukrainians forcibly transferred to Russian territories by Russian forces. Ukraine has suffered hundreds of thousands of casualties as a result of the war as well.
Why would the two sides trade land for peace now?
On the Ukrainian side:
- In Crimea, more than two-thirds of the population claims Russian as its native language.
- Nearly 30 percent of Ukrainians speak Russian as their first language; almost all are concentrated in the areas contested in the present war.
- Ethnic Russians are the largest nationality in some of these oblasts as well.
- The Ukrainian president has previously acknowledged that his armed forces lack the capabilities needed to reclaim land from Moscow.
- However, after any settlement, Kiev could still attempt diplomatic means to return the land to its control.
On the Russian side:
- Fortune reports that a “fiscal crunch” is about to hit Russia’s war machine. In June, the country’s economy minister warned that Russia was “on the brink” of a recession.
- Oil revenues are weakening while war spending continues to soar.
- Widening deficits may cause Russia to run out of financial reserves, forcing cuts to public expenditures. Such cuts could be highly unpopular with the Russian populace, threatening Mr. Putin’s standing with them.
- Over a thousand multinational businesses have exited from Russia.
- Inflation is skyrocketing, with basic food items becoming prohibitively expensive.
When zero-sum conflicts emerge
Obviously, no one knows what will transpire in Friday’s meeting, assuming it happens. But we do know that each side will do what it perceives to be best for its side. Henry Kissinger was right: nations have no permanent friends or enemies, only interests.
The problem comes in zero-sum scenarios by which one side must lose for the other side to win. With territorial disputes, this is often the case. Israel and the Palestinians both want Jerusalem for their capital. Taiwan claims independence from China, which claims the island as its own.
When zero-sum conflicts emerge, we discover another reason humanity needs the biblical worldview. Scripture consistently teaches that this world is not our home, that we are sojourners here and our “citizenship is in heaven” (Philippians 3:20). Accordingly, we can concede temporal means for eternal ends:
- We can “give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you” (Matthew 5:42), whatever the temporal cost of such compassion.
- We can forgive our enemies rather than seeking retribution or revenge (Matthew 5:43–48).
- We can give to the needy without recognition or temporal reward (Matthew 6:1–4).
- We can “lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven” (Matthew 6:20) by serving those who cannot serve us (Matthew 25:31–40).
If nations and people did what was just rather than what serves their temporal interests, the short-term cost would accrue to transformational long-term benefits. What would become of war? Crime? Sexual immorality? Prejudice and discrimination?
“Jesus will have none of that”
Acting in this way requires dying to self and living for the good of others. Only one Person has perfectly done this. The good news is that the same Spirit who empowered Jesus stands ready to empower us. The more we are yielded to him, the more we manifest his unconditional and sacrificial love for those he loves—and he loves everyone (Galatians 5:22; 1 John 4:8).
The way to measure whether we are “filled with the Spirit” (Ephesians 5:18) is to see how we treat people we don’t have to treat well, those who cannot repay us or benefit us in a way commensurate with our service to them. Tim Keller observed:
We instinctively tend to limit for whom we exert ourselves. We do it for people like us, and for people whom we like. Jesus will have none of that. By depicting a Samaritan helping a Jew, Jesus could not have found a more forceful way to say that anyone at all in need—regardless of race, class, and religion—is your neighbor. Not everyone is your brother or sister in faith, but everyone is your neighbor, and you must love your neighbor.
How will you treat the next neighbor you meet today?
Quote for the day:
“You can’t live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you.” —legendary coach John Wooden
Our latest website resources:
Denison Forum
DAILY DEVOTIONS, NEWS AND INFORMATION 